Talk:John Paul II
Status The pope in the novel survived. But the real-life pope had passed away. So what should we do about his status? --William.Y.Fremont 15:54, April 29, 2011 (UTC) : Deceased, as per Wiki 24:Status policy (the pertinent part is the third paragraph under the first heading, beginning with the sentence "In those instances when real life"). 18:15, April 29, 2011 (UTC) ::He wasn't just mention in the novel like Joseph Conrad or Lee Harvey Oswald. People may misunderstand the Pope was killed in the novel. --William.Y.Fremont 00:36, April 30, 2011 (UTC) ::: Add in his bio a note that he died in real life and not in the novel. --ASHPD24 00:58, April 30, 2011 (UTC) :::: I think a BGIN about his status would be good for this page. I would also maybe suggest removing the line "but no information is given about their status" from the status policy, as in this case information was given about the pope's status but for consistency we should still adhere to the policy about real-life people--Acer4666 10:35, April 30, 2011 (UTC) :::I think this is a different one. Unlike Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill and several others who just have their names mentioned in the show and have nothing to do with the plot, this "John Paul II" had a significant role. The real-life pope was never got assassinated. I'd like to say John Paul II was a fictional character and his status should be alive. --William.Y.Fremont 15:50, April 30, 2011 (UTC) ::::The discussion about that status policy was had here, which is probably the best place to bring up a case for changing the policy. If you read through the discussion that was had after the policy was worded, you'll see we agreed that there is never "no data" given about any mentioned character, so there is no objective distinction between Reagan and John Paul II, other than their relative significance to the plot. So I think the wording change I mentioned above has to happen whatever, and I'd probably not support changing the policy to include the pope but not Reagan. What would be the criteria for distinguishing between the two cases?--Acer4666 16:32, April 30, 2011 (UTC) If this becomes a policy change discussion it needs to be stopped here and continued at a policy talk page or the forum. 18:14, April 30, 2011 (UTC) :Damn, so we should also change Abdul Rahman Yasin's status to alive? --William.Y.Fremont 03:58, May 1, 2011 (UTC) :: Wow. I haven't read Trinity yet, but is that really supposed to be the same guy as in real life? If it's clear that it is, then we'd keep him deceased. Our policy is to assume that the 24''verse mirrors our own world exactly with the exception of things that explicitly state otherwise. As shocking as it seems to be, I think killing off Yasin is no different than saying that George W. Bush and Barack Obama were never elected to office and a different line of Presidents followed instead. --proudhug 04:21, May 1, 2011 (UTC) ::: I've continued this discussion here, but I think the point of including Abdul Rahman Yasin in the novel is that no-one can definitively say he ''is still alive in real life, and didn't get involved in a plot about killing the pope (or whatever trinity was about)--Acer4666 10:06, May 1, 2011 (UTC) :: I agree with Proudhug. We list Yashin as deceased but the article gets a note about it. Very interesting. I had no idea that was based on a real person. 01:54, May 2, 2011 (UTC)